Developing and Implementing a Constellation Mentoring Program with Canadian Varsity Soccer Teams
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Peer mentors can assist first-year student-athletes transitional demands by offering perspectives and resources to support their adjustment processes. Sports psychology practitioners (SPPs) can form mentoring programs to foster supportive relationships between athletes. We authored this manuscript to showcase the development of a constellation mentoring program (CMP), a form of mentoring where student-athletes had multiple mentors, integrated within two Canadian varsity soccer (football) sport contexts. We begin by situating our university context and why the CMP, underpinned by the athletic career transition model and constellation theory, was needed to support first-year student-athletes’ transitions. We then introduce the stages of the program, beginning with its development, spanning its implementation, and ending with an evaluation to gauge its effectiveness. Each stage was informed using student-athletes’ experiences of their demands in their university contexts. We conclude with reflections on mentor training, preparatory planning, team-building activities, and making time for reflective practice to help guide SPPs interested in adapting this program for use within further contexts.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".